Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)
for conditional use authorization is being proposed for continuance to february 28th, 2013. i have no other items proposed for continuance and i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public comment on the one item proposed for continuance? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners? commissioner sugaya. >> move to continue item number 1 to february 28th. >> second. >> on that motion to continue 795 folsom to february 28th, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? excuse me, commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> here -- i mean, yes, aye. [laughter] >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to 0 and placed you under your consent calendar. all matters listed hereunder constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine by the planning commission, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests
work done would you tell us a permit. >> good evening. this is my first time to remodel the house. i hired a contractor. and i followed his instructions and i didn't know he didn't get a permit. right now i already got the building permit and i'm looking for the electricity and the plumbing contractors so i can get those two permits to fix the property. so i hope you can reduce the penalty for me so i can have more resources to work on though fix this problem. thank you. >> excuse me. did you say you are looking for a replacement contractor? >> yes. >> how are you going to do whether or not the new contractor is able to file the appropriate permits? >> i already asked for recommendations and they are still looking for the proper ones. i haven't gotten one yet, but pretty soon i'm going to have one. >> okay. thank you. >> thanks >> mr. duffy? . good evening commissioners. congratulations on the new appointments. >> thank you. >> on this case we received a complaint that -- the department received a complaint on the 9th of october, 2012, remodeling done without permit. we
it out and allow them to be able to reduce the number of issues that is before us, and therefore be able to not only take care of -- any substantive concerns in agreement with the appellant but allow the permit holder to correct any of the procedural issues that have been brought up-to-date. >> i view this -- the issue here -- i mean what has been presented and the testimony we received and particularly from planning is very troubling to me and seems to me this is exactly called out as the jurisdiction requester has call it out, the serial permitting problem, and i think that -- i think it's a catch me if you can situation, and oh you solve that problem. we will take a slerch hammer to it. gone like it wasn't an issue. these are sophisticated people and this is a problem. if you're so sophisticated and finding loopholes around the way everyone else is required to do it is deeply problematic to me and i am inclined to grant the request. if a continuous is preferred on the part of all parties i would go that route but i think everyone needs to delve in and if there is an environmental r
interior only and no change of use, and the person's name was mcaretta 2, 16/12. i don't know what happened, or why they didn't continue with that. the subsequent permit was issued. and to comply with the notice of violation. i have the details of that. but i believe that it was in november, the 5th, it was a permit issued for a demo of interior walls and removing of the suspended ceiling to comply with the notice of violation and the future will be under separate permit. and that did not go through the planning department it does not need to go through the planning department. so it is a permit application, maybe he did come in. >> mr. duffy, this scope of work normally probably would have been an over the counter. >> it is the over the counter. i don't know why unless, you know, some people think that like he indicated that he needed to aggregate the demo work plus the new ti work. >> some people start with the demo department and we have seen that earlier tonight. but some people start with the smaller part and move to the bigger one and expedites the thing but we like them to get the pe
and the permit holder, given the fact that he has a relatively small building, it is for his own use and that there has already been a bite taken out of it by the planning commission. >> >> okay. i have similar leaning. i have definite sympathies for the individuals and the people who reside in the stage house building. but i think that in this instance, i think that what was very lucidating to me was the comments of the zoning administrator and the visuals provided with respect to the actual impacts. i think that in reading the materials from the appellant's brief, i just disclosed it, and i actually read his briefs. and i was under a different impression and one that where the impact would be much more severe. so for those reasons and some of the reasons that commissioner fung stated my leanings are to uphold the permit. >> yeah. for me it is a little difficult case because of the fact for one i sympathize with any obstruction of this kind, especially in even if it does not directly block the sunlight, i think that there is going to be an impact so i am sympathetic to that. but wha
? is it a balance license? what standard are we going to use? >> >> and that would be unfair to the public at a whole. >> do you have any -- >> i do and the issue is background check and you stated the primary reason it requires a valid id so you can do a background check and issue a license for fortuneteller. >> that's correct. that's one of the reasons. >> which makes infinite sense to me, so if a medical marijuana card issued by the state requires a background check to be issued wouldn't it be valid for your licensing purposes? >> that's a good question. a thorough and complete background check starts with knowing that your backgrounding the person who is applying for the permit. if that person's identity is something different the background check has no merit, so it's very important -- it wouldn't have any merit because you would be backgrounding somebody who is not the real person applying for the permit. what i am getting at is even if the state of california and i don't think they do a criminal background check. i don't know that for sure but i don't think they do. even if they
to san franciscans. but it's especially heartwarming to us to be able to collaborate and to bring housing and services together and the collaboration between mercy housing and st. anthony's. we would like to thank banc of america, who was our capital partner in the new markets program and again, we're simply thrilled to be part of this. it speaks perfectly to the vision that many of us share for how to move families and communities forward. i have to say that i for one, if this is what the groundbreaking is like, i am incredibly excited to go to the grand opening celebration. thank you all. [ applause ] >> thank you, nancy. i would like to make sure that we thank the staff of st. anthony's, who is here in force today. raise your hands and thank them. [ applause ] a couple of other grantors to st. anthony's, thanking jack fitzpatrick, who is here. stephanie and the koretfolks that have already been mentioned. we're actually going to do a groundbreaking. so i would ask those involved on that, that is everybody on the stage pretty much to start moving into the pit. so if you can stand up
walking distance. you see the kids that are using what's provided, but there is so much opportunity for this to be a stronger, more welcoming, healthier, cleaner, safer place for the people in this community to play. there are going to be new green areas, a full-size basketball court, outdoor fitness equipment, community gardens, a brand-new clubhouse. it's going to be a much more welcoming spot for a neighborhood that really needs it. ♪ ♪ >> good evening and welcome to the january 16th, 2013 meeting of the san francisco board of appeals. the presiding officer this evening is board president chris hwang joined by vice president frank fung, commissioner lazarus and commissioner darryl honda. commissioner hurtado is absent this evening. the deputy city attorney will provide the board with any legal advice i'm cynthia goldstein the board's executive director. we're joined from representatives from the city departments with the cases before us. scott sanchez is here, he is representing the planning department and planning commission. joseph duffy, senior building inspector represen
it is there for somehow illegally using this unit for whatever reason it is not considered a separate single unit. they have, in fact, admitted that they planned to do rent increases. if this were... mr. zaches just said on the record that they were going to increase his rent. as a single family home the rent could be increased without limitation whatsoever. mr. hyman could go to paying five times his rent. and this would be a defacto eviction. >> we would have him stipulate no rent increase. and we ask that this board as a condition of approving these permits, if they are not going to deny them, that the owner put on the record he will not do any sort of no-fault eviction on my client and will be or abide by the rent control increases if this was a rental unit in a multiunit dwelling not in a single family home which has no rent increase limitations. >> glad stone. >> first of all, i want you to think about what mr. duffy just said he said that it does not look like a three-unit building, i agree, we do not main thayne that it is. the fact that there is no record at housing inspection division o
departments with the cases before us. scott sanchez is here, he is representing the planning department and planning commission. joseph duffy, senior building inspector representing the department of building inspection. john kwong is here and i'm not sure if they are in the room, but i'm expecting representatives from the environmental health section of the department of health. if you could conduct the swearing-in process. >> the board requests that you turn off all phones and pagers so they will not disturb the proceedings. please carry on conversations in the hallways. the board's rules of presentation are as follows, appellants, permit holders and department representatives each have seven minutes to present their cases and three minutes for rebuttals. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments within the 7 or 3-minute periods. members of the public, who are not affiliated with the partis have up to 3 minutes each to address the board, but no rebuttals. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of minutes, the members of public who wish to speak on an i
. the proposed use of the site is for distribution of rental equipment and the existing house will be maintained and the parking lot will be paved and the handicapped bathrooms will be added and security lights will be installed. >> the proposed business for the site will add valuable jobs and increase the security for the neighborhoods while discouraging vandalism. they tested the soil and confirmed that only background levels of diesel and oil that were below the threshold were present. mr. dodt refused our offer. >> your time is up. >> is it roll and whitney? >> no it is the old firm. >> okay, we could hear from the departments now, mr. duffy. >> good evening commissioners. just getting updated on this case today. there was a flurry of activity at the site at the last meeting after the last hearing. indeed, and one of our building inspectors was refused entry by one of the workers and we don't have to call the police too often but sometimes we do when we feel threatened and the building inspector did feel threatened. i believe that it all fairly quickly, when he went back, the workers had lef
the department of public works bureau of street use and mapping. application nato 12mff0083. is the appellant in the room? i do not see the apellant in the room and we have not seen the appellant here this evening. we have the department here. if you would like to have the department speak? >> sure. >> good evening commissioners. john kwong from the department of public works once again. in this specific case for this permit for the service of chai tea at 79 new montgomery, the department denied in it this case for like foods. in the evaluation there is a starbucks coffee and jumba juice, who serve similar types of drinks it's relates to tai chi or chai coffee in this case. we denied it and we believe in the evaluation what was appropriate based upon the guidelines. thank you. >> thank you. is there any public comment? i'm going to give you two. i'm barry hearing it right now. >> eke. i also have 102-degree fever. i would like my three minutes. thank you. >> i have to give you two. >> you can have three. let's not fight about this. go ahead and take your three. >> i wasn't notified ab
? and therefore, you know, use more city resources, for purposes of advancing the interest of permit holder that i believe has done some things that are unseemly. >> i understand your concern, i share those concerns as well. and you know i was surprised by what i saw at the sight today and however i feel that this is the best resolution for all parties, moving forward for the appellant and for the permit holder for the city that this is the best way to insure that we are going to get a project that will comply with the project of the planning code. >> the next thing that i wanted to mention is that if so the next meeting that we have on the calendar is the 20th and if you believe that all parties can deliver and there is not going to be any kind of a problem in delivering, you know, said documents, to each other, timely, enough time to review, the next meeting that we have is march sixth and so if you are going to undertake this ambitious time line, it would behoov you do do it so that it happens on the 20th, rather than the 26th. >> one discussion that we had outside is that the day before we are
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)